5 ms·

I'm yet to see a clear explanation for citizens not being as much of a risk as, say, a random foreigner located far away from your country. If anything, a citi

by dictum 8y ago

I'm yet to see a clear explanation for citizens not being as much of a risk as, say, a random foreigner located far away from your country. If anything, a citizen is more capable of carrying out a terrorist attack, or just doing any action some foreign power wants to perform in that country. The exception for domestic citizens seems to be just a concession for the masses and their representatives, not a pragmatic choice. Edit: a pragmatic reasoning could be compartmentalization — keeping citizens under the watch of a separate entity (e.g. FBI) but it doesn't explain why domestic mass surveillance should be ruled out.

wefarrell 8y ago
Domestic threats are outside of the CIA's scope.
JustSomeNobody 8y ago
The constitution and amendments to it give us certain rights. It really doesn't matter if citizens are a much larger risk or not.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
nickelcitymario 8y ago
> "...it doesn't explain why domestic mass surveillance should be ruled out." It's a matter of who we have a responsibility towards. The government we elect in our own country is responsible to us, and as a people we widely do not want our government spying on us. (This is true in most if not all countries.) But that same government is NOT responsible to the citizens of other nations. The CIA has no responsibility towards Canadians (like myself) or anyone else who isn't American. I'm not arguing that this is ethically right. I'm just saying it's pragmatic. If you're not a citizen of my country, my country has no legal obligations to you outside of international law. And no country, to my knowledge, has ever tried to introduce the right to privacy into international law. Every country hates spies within its own borders, but seeks to have them inside of everyone else's.
marnett 8y ago
The American revolution was started because citizens did not want the government in their homes.
- nickelcitymario 8y ago
  I don't think that's historically accurate. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the battle cry of the revolution "no taxation without representation"? It wasn't about privacy, it was about wanting to be more than just a backwater colony.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > wasn't the battle cry of the revolution "no taxation without representation"? That was a slogan of the revolution, but there were more than one; it wasn't the unique complaint. There was also a fairly specific list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence.
  - max76 8y ago
    "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." -- The 3rd Amendment The early revolutionary war history overly simplified is something like this. Britain increases taxes on America. America stops paying taxes. Britain increases military presence to force America to pay taxes. America fought against the British military. During the increased British military presence in America the British goverment did terrible things, including living in civilians homes and eating their food. This is what the parent comment meant when he said "The American revolution was started because citizens did not want the government in their homes." Ultimately, the British goverment was in American homes to help the tax collection effort, so your idea of early Americans caring a lot about taxation is also true.
    - nickelcitymario 8y ago
      Ah, gotcha. I took it as suggesting the revolution was about privacy, but I see where I was mistaken. Thanks!

by dictum 8y ago

wefarrell 8y ago

Domestic threats are outside of the CIA's scope.

JustSomeNobody 8y ago

The constitution and amendments to it give us certain rights. It really doesn't matter if citizens are a much larger risk or not.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

nickelcitymario 8y ago

> "...it doesn't explain why domestic mass surveillance should be ruled out." It's a matter of who we have a responsibility towards. The government we elect in our own country is responsible to us, and as a people we widely do not want our government spying on us. (This is true in most if not all countries.) But that same government is NOT responsible to the citizens of other nations. The CIA has no responsibility towards Canadians (like myself) or anyone else who isn't American. I'm not arguing that this is ethically right. I'm just saying it's pragmatic. If you're not a citizen of my country, my country has no legal obligations to you outside of international law. And no country, to my knowledge, has ever tried to introduce the right to privacy into international law. Every country hates spies within its own borders, but seeks to have them inside of everyone else's.

marnett 8y ago

The American revolution was started because citizens did not want the government in their homes.

nickelcitymario 8y ago
I don't think that's historically accurate. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the battle cry of the revolution "no taxation without representation"? It wasn't about privacy, it was about wanting to be more than just a backwater colony.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > wasn't the battle cry of the revolution "no taxation without representation"? That was a slogan of the revolution, but there were more than one; it wasn't the unique complaint. There was also a fairly specific list of grievances in the Declaration of Independence.
- max76 8y ago
  "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." -- The 3rd Amendment The early revolutionary war history overly simplified is something like this. Britain increases taxes on America. America stops paying taxes. Britain increases military presence to force America to pay taxes. America fought against the British military. During the increased British military presence in America the British goverment did terrible things, including living in civilians homes and eating their food. This is what the parent comment meant when he said "The American revolution was started because citizens did not want the government in their homes." Ultimately, the British goverment was in American homes to help the tax collection effort, so your idea of early Americans caring a lot about taxation is also true.
  - nickelcitymario 8y ago
    Ah, gotcha. I took it as suggesting the revolution was about privacy, but I see where I was mistaken. Thanks!